Well, yeah, you do get dumbasses who call for the removal of anything that even looks like a knife in schools. I can think of several reasons they have clearly not been listened to: 1. school meals. I'm pretty sure the average school meal has a knife with it so you can cut up food. ( I may be wrong, but in the UK, school meals are a hot meal by statute, so a knife would be nessecary) 2. Science classes. specifically, dissecting things. uses a scalpel.

so in short, the rabid people aren't being listened to, so there's not really any need to worry on that front.

in all seriousness, though, I would say that any ceremonial knife brought onto school grounds should at the very least be blunted to uselessness. (preferably rounded edge) any knife that is basically only a hilt is fine.

Well, yeah, you do get dumbasses who call for the removal of anything that even looks like a knife in schools. I can think of several reasons they have clearly not been listened to: 1. school meals. I'm pretty sure the average school meal has a knife with it so you can cut up food. ( I may be wrong, but in the UK, school meals are a hot meal by statute, so a knife would be nessecary) 2. Science classes. specifically, dissecting things. uses a scalpel.

In my observations a lot of the unnecessarily strict rules against anything resembling weapons are more in an elementary school setting where kids are more prone to play with their food and bring toys to class anyway... usually a "hot meal" in elementary school, even back when I was attending in the late 80s and early 90s, was something you would still not cut with a knife (e.g. pizza, meatball subs, or spaghetti) or could be cut with a plastic knife, and any science or art class that would require a knife would either be prohibited until a later grade like junior high/high school or only demonstrated by the teacher without class participation.

In high school, things are a bit more complicated. If you take away every single possible thing that could be used as a weapon, you'd have to take away fencing, baseball, some science projects, many art projects, and other vital school curriculums that simply need to be taught. People are already wary of cutting school programs (especially in sports and art), so I think that's why those kinds of things are not as prohibitive in high school. Of course, this is ironic, considering most violence involving guns or knives occur in high school (albeit not during those classes that have access to such weapons).

...of course, in elementary school it's a different story because some parents are all "OMG, my child got hurt by scissors in art class! How could you possibly have allowed these 8 year olds to use them?!" so principles feel more compelled to institute stupid policies to prevent that sort of thing.

As for the impractical kirpan, the loudest commenters unfortunately tend to be the uneducated...

My god you're right. There is actually a commentor there claiming that even a completely blunt kripan is a weapon. No, it's a spatula, at best a short metal stick. A hard bound textbook or metal ruler would do worse damage.

But a kid was stabbed four years ago, so we need a crackdown on knives and things that look like knives. Reactionary illogical fear.

I'm not comfortable with it. Yes religious symbols worn by the student should be allowed but they are usually not weapons. Forgetting the strawman arguements of other religions deciding to carry swords and such, here are some questions:

1. is everyone allowed to have them?
2. are you allowed to inspect them to make sure they have not been sharpened?

And even so no, sharp or blunt it is a knife, even if its small. remember the kid stabbed to death with the tiny little jackknife? it doesn't take much.

I can't remember the word for it, but I saw my fiancee eyeing a ceremonial dagger since she has a mild interest in Paganism, and I bought it for her. It hasn't been sharpened at all, it's just an object for a ritual and not made for cutting or stabbing. So I don't really see the problem. Plus, I grew up in a hick town and all the wannabe cowboys were allowed to have their pocket knives on them, so again, I don't see a problem here.

I'm not comfortable with it. Yes religious symbols worn by the student should be allowed but they are usually not weapons. Forgetting the strawman arguements of other religions deciding to carry swords and such, here are some questions:

1. is everyone allowed to have them?
2. are you allowed to inspect them to make sure they have not been sharpened?

And even so no, sharp or blunt it is a knife, even if its small. remember the kid stabbed to death with the tiny little jackknife? it doesn't take much.

1: Should they have religious reason to carry one, sure, why not? but the primary issue here is religiously important blades, ceremonial ones. So, no, not everyone--just those with a religion that calls for it.

2: Yeah, why not? Make it a stipulation--kirpans must be inspected at random to ensure it's either completely blunt, or glued into the sheathe.

Further....

If it's sharp, it's a knife. if it's blunt...its a chunk of metal shaped like a knife. A blunt knife can't do a hell of a lot of damage that any number of things freely available in the classroom can't also do.

As Andara said, if you really wanna stab someone, a pencil works wonders. Hell, I've seen someone drop a candy cane they'd been sucking on for awhile, and the thing jammed right into the fleshy bit between thumb and index finger. A metal ruler? Those corners can gouge damn well.

Thats not even getting into the kinda havoc a kid could do with a school issued baseball bat. Or, hell, a mop handle.

And even so no, sharp or blunt it is a knife, even if its small. remember the kid stabbed to death with the tiny little jackknife? it doesn't take much.

A blunt knife is not a knife, it is a spatula/stick. I'm not talking about dull, where it is designed to have a cutting edge but it has worn down. Blunt kripans have "edges" with profiles resembling the backside of a wooden ruler, and tips rounded to ~1" diameters. A conventional metal ruler found in about every school has a more dangerous profile, so if a blunted kripan is a weapon, so is a ruler.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kara_CS

I can't remember the word for it, but I saw my fiancee eyeing a ceremonial dagger since she has a mild interest in Paganism, and I bought it for her.

Athame. They tend to be a little more pointy, with edges that at least look like they could be sharp. Though they are mostly for special uses, and not something a pagan would carry full time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duelist925

1: Should they have religious reason to carry one, sure, why not? but the primary issue here is religiously important blades, ceremonial ones. So, no, not everyone--just those with a religion that calls for it.

I'd argue that anyone should be allowed to carry them, regardless of religion. Otherwise you are giving special priveleges to one group, and not the general populace. No one has to 'prove' anything.

I'd argue that anyone should be allowed to carry them, regardless of religion. Otherwise you are giving special priveleges to one group, and not the general populace. No one has to 'prove' anything.

It's not a special privilege. The purpose of the exemption is to make sure that someone can actually be there. It's not allowing religious, ceremonial blades because you want to allow them. It's because you can't ban someone from being in a place on religious grounds.

Generally, exemptions are made to "You can't have that here" for religious, or medical reasons. The reasoning behind either of those is both. That it's not right to ban someone from a place for their religious beliefs, or medical needs.

To ban a Sikh from someplace because he has a full beard, or a turban, or a Kirpan, is to ban him for being a Sikh.

The reason you should have to prove you have a religious or medical reason, is that you should have to prove that keeping you out of here for this reason is saying that you can't be here at all.

To ban a Sikh from someplace because he has a full beard, or a turban, or a Kirpan, is to ban him for being a Sikh.

How about construction sites (must wear hard hat) where Sikhs refuse to wear a hard hat because it can't be worn at the same time as a turban? Or the military, where being clean-shaven is mandatory so that a gas mask will fit properly?

Also, who defines whether or not a religion whose tenets require bearing of arms is a legitimate faith? A few hypotheticals:

- The Church of Jesus Christ (Crusader) based in Quebec requires the faithful to carry a cross-hilted sword. Note that the literal translation of the French version of Canada's national anthem includes "When your arm knows how to carry the sword, it knows how to carry the Cross".

- The Church of Styphon (borrowing from H. Beam Piper) requires its members to carry a Fireseed-based weapon.

- Quoting from "The Noble Savages" (David Drake story set in "The Harriers" universe): "This, said Wenzil, pointing to the stunner in her cutaway holster, "is an icon of my religion. It would violate my cultural personhood to force me to give it up." The team leader thinks to himself that it was pretty much true for Wenzil.

To allow members of one religion to carry their ceremonial weapon, while forbidding members of another to do the same, is discrimination.